4.7 Article

Insulin Sensitivity and Liver Fat: Role of Iron Load

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
卷 96, 期 6, 页码 E958-E961

出版社

ENDOCRINE SOC
DOI: 10.1210/jc.2010-2682

关键词

-

资金

  1. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) [0315381B]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Context: Increased liver fat (LF) is associated with insulin resistance. However, a considerable individual variability between LF and insulin sensitivity (IS) is observed, and at equal levels of LF, insulin-resistant as well as insulin-sensitive individuals are found. Objective: Our objective was to study whether hepatic iron load (HIL) explains some of the variation between IS and LF. Design: HIL was measured using a quantitative T2* magnetic resonance gradient echo imaging technique, and LF was measured by (1)H-magnetic resonance spectroscopy. Low T2* values indicate high HIL. We studied the association of LF and HIL with anthropometric data and IS. A total of 113 healthy nondiabetic subjects [69 females, 44 males; age 47 +/- 1 yr; body mass index (BMI) = 28.9 +/- 0.5 kg/m(2)] at increased risk for type 2 diabetes were included in the study. Results: T2* values adjusted for age negatively associated with serum ferritin levels (P < 0.0001) and positively associated with IS (P = 0.009). In addition, T2* values associated with LF (P = 0.008) but not with BMI (P = 0.6). In a multivariate model, IS adjusted for gender, age, and BMI was associated with T2* values (P = 0.015). IS adjusted for gender and age was independently associated with LF (P = 0.033) and T2* values (P = 0.004). In a stepwise regression analysis, LF explained 13.5% (P < 0.01) of the variation in IS, and HIL explained an additional 4.1% (P = 0.03). Conclusions: HIL explains part of the variation between LF and IS. The mechanism by which iron load induces insulin resistance is possibly independent of the pathways involved in insulin resistance induced by fatty liver disease. (J Clin Endocrinol Metab 96: E958-E961, 2011)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据